In order to solve problems like homelessness and crime, you have to move beyond treating symptoms, right?
Everything hinges on getting to the root cause of the problem.
Well, not exactly.
I’ve seen countless initiatives – including ones I’ve led – get lost by defining a root cause.
They distill the ocean until – hallelujah! – the instigating variable is identified and seized upon.
Simple.
Just tweak or eliminate that causal factor.
But the obsession usually leads to one-dimensional solutions that don’t work.
After years of effort and millions spent, they find that their oversimplified model of cause and effect isn’t useful.
In fact, it’s downright misleading.
Based on personal experience of failure, I can say it’s a costly and frustrating way to learn.
In today’s issue, I’m going to share how I think about problems on a philosophical level, and then give you my one simple trick for getting a deeper understanding of the causes of complex problems (without succumbing to the fallacy of the single cause).
Let’s dive in
Competing worldviews of problems and problem solving
There are two competing metaphysical approaches to thinking about complex problems.
Methodological essentialism versus methodological nominalism.
Once you understand the difference between the two, you’ll never think about problems in the same way again.
Methodological Essentialism
Methodological essentialism is a philosophical approach that aims to reveal the essences of things and describe them through precise definitions.
Change initiatives that adopt this philosophy spend their time defining the problem’s characteristics.
Groups spend months creating lists of terms and their agreed upon definitions.
For example, many housing advocates are currently debating amongst themselves and advocating against the term “homeless” – because they view it as toxic, pejorative, or dehumanizing – in favor of “unhoused”.
The new term intentionally emphasizes a house as the solution, rather than the reasons why any individual may be experiencing homelessness.
But notice what’s happening.
The problem is now being defined as a lack of the preferred solution.
Other solutions, by virtue of the new definition, won’t work.
Word games like this – however well-intentioned and compassionate – tend to focus on identifying a root cause, the one factor believed to be the source of the problem.
Whether you like the terminology switch above or not, you can probably see the slippery slope of this philosophy.
While methodological essentialism may offer a sense of clarity and a straightforward path to intervention, it often overlooks the complexity and interconnectedness of the real world.
Methodological Nominalism
Methodological nominalism is totally different.
Instead of searching for a singular root cause, it focuses on describing how the problem behaves in various circumstances and contexts.
It acknowledges the dynamic interactions between multiple components and aims to identify patterns and regularities within the system.
Let’s return to the homelessness example from above.
Instead of asking, “What is homelessness?” (e.g. trying to define the essence of homelessness, even though everyone generally knows what it is), the nominalist asks questions like:
- Under what conditions does homelessness grow?
- How does change in [variable X] increase or decrease homelessness?
- What are the consequences of [intervention Z]?
Rather than oversimplifying the cause-and-effect relationship with words, methodological nominalism acknowledges that complex problems arise from the interactions of numerous interconnected elements.
By studying these interactions and understanding the systemic relationships, a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the problem can be obtained.
Of course, nominalism doesn’t pretend that words and precise definitions are unimportant.
It just asserts that the phenomena being described and how it behaves takes precedence over the wordsmithing activity of defining so-called essences.
As the philosopher of science Karl Popper, whose writings inspired this issue of the newsletter, summed up:
“…I believe that nothing depends upon words, and everything upon our practical demands or upon the proposals for framing our policy which we decide to adopt.”
Why Methodological Nominalism is Superior for Complex Problems
When dealing with complex problems such as homelessness, methodological nominalism offers four advantages over methodological essentialism:
- Embracing Complexity: Methodological nominalism recognizes and embraces the complexity of real-world problems. It acknowledges that problems arise from a multitude of factors and their interactions, rather than a single cause. By exploring the behavior and relationships of these components, a more accurate understanding of the problem can be achieved.
- Systemic Perspective: Methodological nominalism adopts a systemic perspective, recognizing that complex problems are embedded within broader systems. It considers the interdependencies and feedback loops between various factors, allowing for a deeper understanding of the problem’s dynamics. This systemic perspective helps avoid oversimplification and reveals the intricate web of relationships that contribute to the issue.
- Comprehensive Solutions: By focusing on understanding the behavior of the problem within its context, methodological nominalism opens up the possibility of developing comprehensive solutions. Instead of relying on superficial interventions that target only a single cause, this approach allows for the identification of multiple leverage points and intervention strategies that address the complexity of the problem from various angles.
- Adaptability and Learning: Methodological nominalism encourages ongoing learning and adaptation. It acknowledges that our understanding of a complex problem evolves over time and with new insights. This flexibility allows for iterative problem-solving, where interventions can be refined and adjusted based on a deeper understanding of the problem’s behavior.
One simple trick for getting a deeper understanding
Shift your focus from asking
“What is the problem”
to asking
“How does the problem behave when…”
It’s really that easy.
See you again next week.
==
Whenever you’re ready, there are two ways I can help you:
→ I’m a strategic advisor for the toughest societal problems like poverty, crime and homelessness. People come to me when they want to stop spinning their wheels and get transformative, systems-level change.
→ I’m a coach for emerging and executive leaders in the social and public sectors who want to make progress on their biggest goals and challenges.
Let’s find out how I can help you become transformational.
